Author Topic: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate  (Read 13830 times)

Keranu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9054
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #315 on: January 13, 2009, 05:31:07 PM »
Interesting point, Lord Thag! I'm surprised I never thought of that before.

Come to think of it, it can be applied even more to handhelds:

Gameboy destroyed all competition for an entire decade, despite being in black and white! Lynx was the first to step up against it and was far more technologically imrpessive, but didn't have a chance. Turbo Express, Game Gear (though did well enough on it's own), Nomad, Neo Geo Pocket, Game.com; none of them could stop it.

Gameboy Color beat out Neo Geo Pocket Color by a long shot, though I'm not sure if the NGPC was any more powerful (I always thought it was personally).

By the time of Gameboy Advance, I guess other companies realized there wasn't much of a chance of taking away the crown from the Gameboy series. So uhh, I guess you could say N-Gage here? Wonderswan Color maybe?

Nintendo DS is constantly breaking sales records, despite being known for being less powerful than PSP.
Quote from: Bonknuts
Adding PCE console specific layer on top of that, makes for an interesting challenge (no, not a reference to Ys II).

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #316 on: January 13, 2009, 07:18:58 PM »
wonderswan color was much more a gameboy color competitor than to the GBA.

nintendo just always had the success on their side. the name, the image, the prestigious software developers and a just as possible compact as well easy to handle hardware at the time. technology was always secondary in the handheld biz.
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #317 on: January 13, 2009, 07:30:41 PM »
Playstation wins over the far superior N64 by a mile, and topples the Big N from it's perch.
:-k
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Joe Redifer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #318 on: January 14, 2009, 09:36:29 AM »
I absolutely agree that the specifications of a system don't really matter as long as the games are good.  But the public doesn't always seem to think so.  If they did, we'd still be playing 16-bit era consoles.  I chose 16-bit era because that generation had some of the most playable games and the technology allowed it to do more things vs Atari2600 technology or even NES technology.  Saturn and Playstation allowed for 3D gameplay, but it is debatable whether that really adds anything.  I guess it does, since certain games could not exist without 3D.  But then again, we stepped up to Xbox 360, etc from normal Xbox, etc, didn't we?  The new consoles don't really offer any new gameplay compared to the previous generation, so people must want the graphics!  Then there's the Wii...

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #319 on: January 14, 2009, 11:32:30 AM »
They do, but I think the Genesis is capable of the better voice.  There's a discussion along with examples somewhere around here (the Turbo still has great voice).  If the Turbo wasn't the Turbo, it wouldn't be as cool!

The Genesis and TG-16 are both capable of samples clear enough that it doesn't matter what difference there may be technically. The Genesis has a better variety of voice samples in published games, but I still think that the PCE Lunar voice sample sound as good as or better than anything on Genesis or SNES.

Although it went underused, sample sounds (quality + channels) are one of the biggest strengths the TG-16 has over Genesis and arguably the SNES (quality-wise). The Genesis's single sample channel is the only major weakness other than the palette restrictions. If the Genesis had the same 512 master palette, but sub-palettes more like the SNES and the ability to do even just 2 - 4 samples at a time, most people would probably have thought that the Genesis was the most powerful system of the 16-bit era and the SNES' gimmicks wouldn't have been enough to sway opinions (even if EGM were to still call the SNES teh best(!) for the rest of its lifespan).
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

Joe Redifer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #320 on: January 14, 2009, 11:36:54 AM »
I do wish there were more HuCards that took better advantage of sampled sounds.  I am forever grateful that the thing didn't have a reverb chip, though.  :)

Lord Thag

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #321 on: January 14, 2009, 11:46:16 AM »
Quote
Playstation wins over the far superior N64 by a mile, and topples the Big N from it's perch

Technically speaking, I mean.  :lol:

I agree, I hate the N64, but it did 3D WAY better than the PS1.
Dodging little white bullets since the Carter administration

Joe Redifer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #322 on: January 14, 2009, 11:52:42 AM »
Yes and no.  I would concede that it can move more polygons, but it was also way more foggy.  Granted the PS1 was hyper-grainy so I guess I really don't have much to go on here.

spenoza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #323 on: January 14, 2009, 01:01:07 PM »
Most of the technical information I've read indicated that the Playstation could display more polygons than the N64. The N64 probably had a more powerful CPU overall, but it was also damned hard to code for. And the 4 KB texture limitations on the N64 also hamstrung developers.

I think it's safe to say the PS1 was the complete opposite of the PS2 in that it was relatively easy to program for and followed a VERY traditional 3D paradigm. And in that sense the N64 was almost more a harbinger of the PS2 than the PS1 was.

What PCE games used polygonal graphics? Didn't Gunboat?
<a href="http://www.pcedaisakusen.net/2/34/103/show-collection.htm" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">My meager PC Engine Collection so far.</a><br><a href="https://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">PC Engine Software Bible</a><br><a href="http://www.racketboy.com/forum/" c

nat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7085
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #324 on: January 14, 2009, 01:45:46 PM »
Yeah, Gunboat does and so does Falcon. Sapphire. There is one scene in Legend of Xanadu with a rotating three dimensional diamond, and I've never been able to tell whether that is made from polygons or not.

Necromancer

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21374
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #325 on: January 14, 2009, 04:52:56 PM »
At the end of the day, it's THE GAMES, not the capabilities of the system, that win. It's never been about capability. It's about accessability, affordability, and library size.

Agreed, though it doesn't seem applicable to the current gen systems; the 360 is easier to find, cheaper, and has a much larger library.  In this case, I think it is the capabilities of the system (specifically the motion sensing gimmick) coupled with good marketing and a hatred for shoddy build quality and all things MS.


Sapphire.

Those were all pre-rendered sprites, though, weren't they?  Faceball pumps 'em out real-time, just like a PS3!
U.S. Collection: 98% complete    157/161 titles

nat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7085
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #326 on: January 14, 2009, 05:16:21 PM »
Were they all? I thought the primitive ones were "real." But, what do I know?!

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #327 on: January 14, 2009, 09:10:37 PM »
yeah..i thought those blue rotating primitive ships were rendered in real time, since you also can't see any color-compressions on those as you can see it on the bigger, more poligonal sprites. but, what do I know?!
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

ParanoiaDragon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4619
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #328 on: January 14, 2009, 09:21:27 PM »
Yes and no.  I would concede that it can move more polygons, but it was also way more foggy.  Granted the PS1 was hyper-grainy so I guess I really don't have much to go on here.

The graphics on N64 were always boring & lifeless to me with a lack of detail, with the PS1's gfx being choppier but more detailed.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2009, 09:23:19 PM by ParanoiaDragon »

Keranu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9054
Re: Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate
« Reply #329 on: January 14, 2009, 09:30:25 PM »
Sapphire's polygons were pre-rendered, as far as I know. They probably just drew them that way to fool people into thinking that they were running real time. There's been debate here before whether the ships in Silpheed for Sega CD were pre-rendered or not.
Quote from: Bonknuts
Adding PCE console specific layer on top of that, makes for an interesting challenge (no, not a reference to Ys II).